IPN analysis: Gagauzia celebrated a new anniversary of the obtaining of the status of autonomous unit. What did the appearance of this administrative unit with special status mean for Moldova: a catastrophe or an invaluable advantage?

A decisive law

December 23 was a nonworking day in Gagauzia. On this day during 19 years, the locals have celebrated one of the most important national holidays – the Day of Formation of the Gagauz Unit.

The appearance of a new autonomous administrative unit on Moldova’s map was possible due to the adoption by Parliament of the Law on the Special Legal Status of Gagauzia in 1994. Before the adoption of this act, the areas that were compactly inhabited by Gagauz people formally formed the independent Gagauz Republic that was proclaimed on August 19, 1990. After the adoption by the legislature of this crucial law for the Gagauz people, a referendum on joining the new autonomous unit was held in the southern districts. The settlements where the Gagauz people represented more than 50% entered Gagauzia automatically.

Not only the Gagauz villages chose to become part of this territorial unit. For example, the village Ferapontievca, whose population is predominantly Ukrainian, also entered Gagauzia. The same path was followed by the residents of Svetloe commune, who represents a real amalgam of Moldovans, Bulgarians, Russians and Gagauz people. As a result of the plebiscite, three towns, which became district centers, and 23 villages constituted Gagauzia.

Place where the Gagauz people live is Gagauz land

The full name of the autonomous unit is the Autonomous Territorial Unit of Gagauz-yeri (Gagauzia). In Comrat, it is said that when the law on the Gagauz autonomous unit was formulated, the Gagauz deputies misled the other colleagues, translating incorrectly the words “Gagauz-yeri”. In the press, this name is often interpreted as the ‘place where the Gagaus people live’. In reality, Gagauz-yeri in the Gagauz language literally means ‘land of the Gagauz people.

In 1994, a sincere approach to the territorial requirements could have blocked the adoption of the law. Thus, it was decided to ‘present’ a comfortable formula both for the Moldovan MPs and for the collective conscience of Moldovan society. But the Gagauz people from the very beginning reserved the right over this land and, respectively, over its political fate.

Another Gagauzia

During 19 years, the region has acquired unique characteristics. It became a separate entity whose residents are considerably different from the rest of the country’s people. Besides the evident ethnical-linguistic differences, the Gagauz people are different by their special political preferences. In elections, the anti-Romania and pro-Russia slogans are here more dominant than in other areas of Moldova. Furthermore, the Gagauz people are much more Euro-skeptical than the average Moldovan. The sociological surveys reveal the existence of regional political conscience. According to opinion polls, the Gagauz people consider that the local elections are much more relevant and important than the national ones.

During two decades, the Gagauz people’s interest in politics increased, as the electoral activism did. First of all, the formation of Gagauzia took place by a referendum. Afterward, the locals chose their capital by direct vote. After the bodies of the power were created in the region, the Gagauz people went to the polls practically every year. Besides taking part in the national parliamentary and local elections, the residents of Gagauzia choose their Governor and the deputies in the People’s Assembly.

The Gagauz people also differ by the selection of the foreign strategic partners. They are for cooperation with Russia and Turkey. Comrat never hurried to declare a vector ‘without alternative’ and tried to establish relations with each of the countries that promised benefits for the autonomous region – from China and Azerbaijan to Poland and Romania. This makes those from Gagauzia different from Moldova’s administration.

The Gagauz dilemma

We can enumerate examples endlessly. But something else is really important: how to tackle these differences? We are witnesses to the political separation of Gagauzia. Is it now opportune to put penalties on the region’s administration? Or Moldova is a complex ethnical-linguistic and political-administrative entity and in this case the country’s political class should show correctness, diplomacy and political culture so as to efficiency manage this diversity? In other words: is the creation of the autonomous unit of Gagauzia devastating for the country or an invaluable advantage? Can Moldova become a conclusive example of resolving interethnic conflicts for a whole world? This question has dominated the relations between Chisinau and Comrat for 19 years already. Maybe this dilemma will be solved on the 20th anniversary.

Veaceslav Craciun, IPN